Shipping 2026

ANGOLA Law and Practice Contributed by: José Miguel Oliveira, António Caxito Marques, Caio de Mello Ferreira and João Saiago Canjeque, VdA

numerous legal authors – for arguing that the Conven - tion forms part of the Angolan legal order. To the best of our knowledge, however, the higher courts have not yet addressed treaty interpretation by reference to Articles 31 and 32 of the Vienna Con - vention. Nevertheless, prevailing legal scholarship provides a foundation for outlining the interpretative process that should be adopted. First, the object of interpretation (ie, identifying the applicable legal norms) should be both objective (aim - ing to discern the mens legis) and contemporaneous (considering the norms within their current context). The elements of interpretation encompass both lit - eral (the text of the treaty itself) and extra-textual (instruments assisting in achieving the interpretative objective) considerations. The extra-textual elements include the systematic, teleological and historical approaches. Regarding the systematic element), the treaty’s “con - text” must be taken into account, including, inter alia, the text, preamble, annexes, and any other agree - ments concluded in connection with the treaty (Article 31 (2)). The teleological element is likewise recognised, requiring interpretation in light of the treaty’s object and purpose (Article 31 (1)). The historical element, which encompasses the travaux préparatoires and the circumstances surrounding the treaty’s conclusion, is considered a supplementary means. The Convention itself assigns a subsidiary role to this element, limit - ing its use to the instances prescribed in Article 32 (a) and (b). Beyond these interpretative elements, general prin - ciples – such as good faith, the recognition of the implied effects of treaties, and teleological interpreta - tion – must also be observed. In light of the above, the approach outlined in par - agraphs 57 (2), (3) and (4) of the MSC Mediterra- nean Shipping Company SA v Conti 11 Container Schiffahrts-GmbH & Co KG MS “MSC Flaminia” UK Supreme Court decision closely aligns with the method of interpretation likely to be adopted by judicial bodies within the Angolan legal order. By contrast, points (1)

and (5), although relevant, might not be appropriately regarded as general constituent elements of the inter -

pretative framework under Angolan law. 3.5 Procedure and Requirements for Establishing a Limitation Fund

Pursuant to the 1957 Convention, the ship-owner or another entitled person can limit its liability by estab - lishing a limitation fund. The limitation fund can be established in any way admitted in the law and is dependent on the filing of an application before the competent court. The application must identify: • the occurrence and damages; • the amount of the limitation fund; • how the fund will be established; • the amount of the reserve; and • the known creditors and the amounts of their claims. The application must be filed along with the vessel’s documents (eg, a tonnage certificate) supporting the calculation of the amount of the fund. The calculation of the limitation fund shall be in accordance with Arti - cle 3 of the 1957 Convention. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, limitation funds have not been established in Angola. The authors believe that the courts would most likely insist on a cash deposit or local bank letter of guarantee. 3.6 Seafarers’ Safety and Owners’ Liability Angola is not a party to the Maritime Labour Conven - tion. Seafarers’ rights and safety are generally gov - erned by the Commercial Code, the General Labour Law (Law No 7/15 of 15 June 2015) and the Merchant Navy Law.

4. Cargo Claims 4.1 Bills of Lading

The provisions of the 1924 International Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules of Law relating to Bills of Lading (the “Hague Rules”) are applicable in Angola. Angola is not a signatory of the Hague–Visby Rules, the Hamburg Rules or the Rotterdam Rules.

CHAMBERS.COM